As
everyone knows, on 11 September, less than an hour after the attack on
the World Trade Centre, an airplane collided with the Pentagon. The Associated
Press first reported that a booby-trapped truck had caused the explosion.
The Pentagon quickly denied this. The official US government version of
events still holds. Here's a little game for you: Take a look at these
photographs and try to find evidence to corroborate the official version.
It's up to you to Hunt the Boeing!

The first satellite image shows the section of the building
that was hit by the Boeing. In the image below, the second
ring of the building is also visible. It is clear that the
aircraft only hit the first ring. The four interior rings
remain intact. They were only fire-damaged after the initial
explosion.

Can you explain how a Boeing 757-200, weighing
nearly 100 tons and travelling at a minimum speed of 250 miles
an hour* only damaged the outside of the Pentagon?

The two photographs in question 2 show the building just
after the attack. We may observe that the aircraft only hit
the ground floor. The four upper floors collapsed towards
10.10 am. The building is 26 yards high.

Can you explain how a Boeing 14.9 yards high,
51.7 yards long, with a wingspan of 41.6 yards and a cockpit
3.8 yards high, could crash into just the ground floor of
this building?

The photographs in Question 5 show representations of a Boeing
757-200 superimposed on the section of the building that was
hit.

Can you explain what happened to the wings
of the aircraft and why they caused no damage?

Question n°6

When asked by a journalist: "Is
there anything left of the aircraft at all?"

"First of all, the question
about the aircraft, there are some small pieces of aircraft
visible from the interior during this fire-fighting
operation I'm talking about, but not large sections.
In other words, there's no fuselage sections and that
sort of thing." " You know, I'd rather not
comment on that. We have a lot of eyewitnesses that
can give you better information about what actually
happened with the aircraft as it approached. So we don't
know. I don't know."

When asked by a journalist:
"Where is the jet fuel?"
"We have what we believe is a puddle right there
that the -- what we believe is to be the nose of the
aircraft. So -"

The quotations in Question 6 correspond to statements made
by Arlington County Fire Chief, Ed Plaugher, at a press conference
held by Assistant Defence Secretary, Victoria Clarke, on 12
September 2001, at the Pentagon.

Can you explain why the County Fire Chief
could not tell reporters where the aircraft was?

Did you find the Boeing? Can you still defend the official
version of events?> Well done! Remember to get in touch with master of illusion,
David Copperfield. He'll be glad to hear from you!

You found the official version lacking in something
(like a Boeing, for example):> If you begin to question whether a Boeing really
did crash on the Pentagon then, no doubt, you'll be wondering what happened
to the aircraft that disappeared. You will probably ask yourself why the
US government even told you this story in the first place and you'll start
asking yourself lots of other questions besides. Don't worry! This is
perfectly normal!

Source: www.reseauvoltaire.net
- The photographs are official images and available on US army sites -
See also "L'affaire
du Pentagone" - Translation: Mr Sly - NB: Appearing on bookshelves
end of March, the investigation by the Chair of the Réseau Voltaire
into the September 11 attacks, examining the Bin Laden networks and American
secret service involvement.